or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Spiral Learning

post #1 of 33
Thread Starter 

Here you go, gang.  Spiral Learning.  It's a system for learning to ski, in which you progressively build your skills in all the primary skill areas (edging, balance, etc.) harmoniously, never letting development in one area get too far ahead of the others.  Here's the short article I wrote about it a few years ago.  Have a read, kick it around a bit.

 

http://yourskicoach.com/Articles/SpiralLearning/SpiralLearning.pdf


Edited by Rick - 7/31/15 at 12:30pm
post #2 of 33

HomePerspectives Cognitive Jerome Bruner

 
 
 
 
 
powered by
small-logo.png
Custom Search
 
 
Sort by:
Relevance
 
Relevance
Date
 
 
Web
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Bruner

by Saul McLeod published 2008, updated 2012

 

 

The outcome of cognitive development is thinking. The intelligent mind creates from experience "generic coding systems that permit one to go beyond the data to new and possibly fruitful predictions" (Bruner, 1957, p. 234).

 

Thus, children as they grow must acquire a way of representing the "recurrent regularities" in their environment. 

 

So, to Bruner, important outcomes of learning include not just the concepts, categories, and problem-solving procedures invented previously by the culture, but also the ability to "invent" these things for oneself.

Cognitive growth involves an interaction between basic human capabilities and "culturally invented technologies that serve as amplifiers of these capabilities." These culturally invented technologies include not just obvious things such as computers and television, but also more abstract notions such as the way a culture categorizes phenomena, and language itself. Bruner would likely agree with Vygotsky that language serves to mediate between environmental stimuli and the individual's response.

 

The aim of education should be to create autonomous learners (i.e., learning to learn).

 

In his research on the cognitive development of children (1966),  Jerome Bruner proposed three modes of representation:

  • Enactive representation (action-based)
  • Iconic representation (image-based)
  • Symbolic representation (language-based)
 

 

Bruner's Three Modes of Representation

 

Modes of representation are the way in which information or knowledge are stored and encoded in memory.

Rather than neat age related stages (like Piaget), the modes of representation are integrated and only loosely sequential as they "translate" into each other.

 

Enactive

(0 - 1 years)

 

This appears first. It involves encoding action based information and storing it in our memory. For example, in the form of movement as a muscle memory, a baby might remember the action of shaking a rattle.

The child represents past events through motor responses, i.e. an infant will “shake a rattle” which has just been removed or dropped, as if the movements themselves are expected to produce the accustomed sound. And this is not just limited to children.

Many adults can perform a variety of motor tasks (typing, sewing a shirt, operating a lawn mower) that they would find difficult to describe in iconic (picture) or symbolic (word) form.

 

Iconic

(1 - 6 years)

 

This is where information is stored visually in the form of images (a mental picture in the mind’s eye). For some, this is conscious; others say they don’t experience it. This may explain why, when we are learning a new subject, it is often helpful to have diagrams or illustrations to accompany verbal information.

 

Symbolic

(7 years onwards)

 

This develops last. This is where information is stored in the form of a code or symbol, such as language. This is the most adaptable form of representation, for actions & images have a fixed relation to that which they represent. Dog is a symbolic representation of a single class.

Symbols are flexible in that they can be manipulated, ordered, classified etc., so the user isn’t constrained by actions or images. In the symbolic stage, knowledge is stored primarily as words, mathematical symbols, or in other symbol systems.

Bruner's constructivist theory suggests it is effective when faced with new material to follow a progression from enactive to iconic to symbolic representation; this holds true even for adult learners. A true instructional designer, Bruner's work also suggests that a learner even of a very young age is capable of learning any material so long as the instruction is organized appropriately, in sharp contrast to the beliefs of Piaget and other stage theorists.

 

 

The Importance of Language

 

Language is important for the increased ability to deal with abstract concepts. Bruner argues that language can code stimuli and free an individual from the constraints of dealing only with appearances, to provide a more complex yet flexible cognition.

The use of words can aid the development of the concepts they represent and can remove the constraints of the “here & now” concept. Basically, he sees the infant as an intelligent & active problem solver from birth, with intellectual abilities basically similar to those of the mature adult.

 

 

Educational Implications

 

For Bruner (1961), the purpose of education is not to impart knowledge, but instead to facilitate a child's thinking and problem solving skills which can then be transferred to a range of situations. Specifically, education should also develop symbolic thinking in children.

In 1960 Bruner's text, The Process of Education was published. The main premise of Bruner's text was that students are active learners who construct their own knowledge.

Bruner (1960) opposed Piaget's notion of readiness. He argued that schools waste time trying to match the complexity of subject material to a child's cognitive stage of development. This means students are held back by teachers as certain topics are deemed to difficult to understand and must be taught when the teacher believes the child has reached the appropriate state of cognitive maturity.

Bruner (1960) adopts a different view and believes a child (of any age) is capable of understanding complex information: 'We begin with the hypothesis that any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development'. (p. 33)

Bruner (1960) explained how this was possible through the concept of the spiral curriculum. This involved information being structured so that complex ideas can be taught at a simplified level first, and then re-visited at more complex levels later on. Therefore, subjects would be taught at levels of gradually increasing difficultly (hence the spiral analogy). Ideally teaching his way should lead to children being able to solve problems by themselves.

Bruner (1961) proposes that learners’ construct their own knowledge and do this by organizing and categorizing information using a coding system. Bruner believed that the most effect way to develop a coding system is to discover it rather than being told it by the teacher. The concept of discovery learning implies that students construct their own knowledge for themselves (also known as a constructivist approach).

The role of the teacher should not be to teach information by rote learning, but instead to facilitate the learning process. This means that a good teacher will design lessons that help student discover the relationship between bits of information. To do this a teacher must give students the information they need, but without organizing for them. The use of the spiral curriculum can aid the process of discovery learning.

 

 

Bruner and Vygotsky

 

Both Bruner and Vygotsky emphasise a child's environment, especially the social environment, more than Piaget did. Both agree that adults should play an active role in assisting the child's learning.

Bruner, like Vygotsky, emphasized the social nature of learning, citing that other people should help a child develop skills through the process of scaffolding. The term scaffolding first appeared in the literature when Wood, Bruner and Ross described how tutors' interacted with preschooler to help them solve a block reconstruction problem (Wood et al., 1976).

The concept of scaffolding is very similar to Vygotsky's notion of the zone of proximal development, and it not uncommon for the terms to be used interchangeably. Scaffolding involves helpful, structured interaction between an adult and a child with the aim of helping the child achieve a specific goal.

'[Scaffolding] refers to the steps taken to reduce the degrees of freedom in carrying out some task so that the child can concentrate on the difficult skill she is in the process of acquiring' (Bruner, 1978, p. 19).

 

 

Bruner and Piaget

 

Obviously there are similarities between Piaget and Bruner, but an important difference is that Bruner’s modes are not related in terms of which presuppose the one that precedes it. Whilst sometimes one mode may dominate in usage, they coexist. Bruner states that what determines the level of intellectual development is the extent to which the child has been given appropriate instruction together with practice or experience. So - the right way of presentation and the right explanation will enable a child to grasp a concept usually only understood by an adult. His theory stresses the role of education and the adult.

Although Bruner proposes stages of cognitive development, he doesn’t see them as representing different separate modes of thought at different points of development (like Piaget). Instead, he sees a gradual development of cognitive skills and techniques into more integrated “adult” cognitive techniques.

Bruner views symbolic representation as crucial for cognitive development and since language is our primary means of symbolizing the world, he attaches great importance to language in determining cognitive development

post #3 of 33

Is this the model you intended Rick?

We sort of scratched the surface of this a while ago in our instructor training but more along the lines of repeating an activity but not spending the entire day dwelling on one skill / movement pattern. The familiarity aspect leading to easier assimilation of recurring concepts regardless of the age of the student. I see a basic scaffold similar to what you described with the acending a spiral stairway but I also layer onto this a variation of Weem's sports diamond where motivation, pleasure, technique and tactics all fit into that lesson management model.

 

Then again I don't want to derail your intended direction of this thread. I'm just sharing some of my experience using a variation of spiral learning to facilitate guided discovery / problem solving.

post #4 of 33
Not exactly sure about putting scaffold on a staircase that also has a layer of sports diamond ... sounds dangerous and complicated. From a consumer perspective I think the spiral learning concept has a good set of legs. A customer student wants to see a road map if they are going to commit. This is a three dimensional road map that addresses the balance required in skill development in a way that will garner a broad understanding while clarifying learning objectives. I really like the six pillars of skills that support the spiral path and think a graphic depicting this would facilitate well. From a program design background perspective, I think this is a concept that would be just as valuable as a marketing tool as would be a learning model. Doesn't matter how good a learning model is if the class seats are empty.
post #5 of 33
Thread Starter 

Yes, JASP, that idea of working on something a bit then going back to it later certainly contributes to the effectiveness of my spiral learning concept.  I have found that something often happens during the timeout from working on a skill that makes it easier to experience success at that skill/drill when a student returns to it later.  Is the mind/body connection doing some kind of subconscious processes during the in between period, that makes things click when the skier returns to the drill again later?  Could be I guess, but something is going on, that's for sure.

 

While Spiral Learning does profit from that phenomenon, it also refers to more.  It's primarily about keeping skill development in in the various skill areas in balance.  You do that because trying to take one skill area prowess to a high level will be an exercise in futility if the development in other skill areas are still at a low level.  The lacking skills in those other areas will act like a lead weight on attempts to master the focus area, and not allow it to happen.  

 

Here are a couple examples.  Say you're trying to learn to balance exclusively on your inside ski, but your edging/steering skills are not good.  Your inability to adequately manage your turn shape skid angle means you will not have the ability to change the  turn forces and thus your balance that most skiers find helpful when first daring to commit fully to the inside ski.  

 

For example two, reverse it.  Say you're going for high edge angle carving, but your lateral balance skills are lacking.  You've not yet learned to ski comfortably while balanced exclusively on your inside ski.  You will therefore be reluctant to move the body so far inside your feet as required by high edge angle carving, for fear of ending up on your inside ski, a situation you know you can't cope with.  

 

And it applies to so many situations.  You can't learn to lateral balance without learning to angulate,  You can't learn to angulate without learning rotary skills,  You can't learn advanced line management if you haven't learned basic edging skills.  You can't learn advanced transitions if you haven't learned basic flexion/extension skills.  An on and on.  

 

Spiral Learning.  It's not a complicated concept at all, but I find it to be very important to keep in mind while teaching.  I'm sure most here do, this is just another way to describe it.

post #6 of 33
Thread Starter 

Thanks, Rich.  Great observation about the diagram.  Janis and I talked about that just this morning.  We'd intended to draw one, but it got put on the back burner.  This thread has brought it back to the forefront for us, and she started working on one today.

post #7 of 33

I think there is something to be said for changing gears to hit different parts of the brain.  cycling through skills is definitely one way to do it.  Its similar in a way, but also a bit different, to the Kolb learning model, where you cycle through 4 different learning styles (for everyone), which basically stimulates more areas of the brain and creates some kind of holistic learning experience.  Light bulb moments.  I think your spiral concept may be similar in this regard.  

 

Here are a couple images of the Kolb cycle:

 

 

 

post #8 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
 

Here you go, gang.  Spiral Learning.  It's a system for learning to ski, in which you progressively build your skills in all the primary skill areas (edging, balance, etc.) harmoniously, never letting development in one area get too far ahead of the others.  Here's the short article I wrote about it a few years ago.  Have a read, kick it around a bit.

 

http://yourskicoach.com/Articles/SpiralLearning/SpiralLearning.pdf


Nice. Makes total sense. I had organized my new website on the same idea: http://www.effectiveskiing.com where the progression takes you on a similar spiral of learning and refining as you improve balance and range of movement.

 

Cool.

 

cheers

post #9 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
 

Thanks, Rich.  Great observation about the diagram.  Janis and I talked about that just this morning.  We'd intended to draw one, but it got put on the back burner.  This thread has brought it back to the forefront for us, and she started working on one today.

 

 

 

While very interesting to check out these other cyclical learning matrices, I don't think they are very similar, are somewhat of a simplification of a complex process and only relevant as supporting evidence/proof of concept. Of course repeating reinforcement cycles of any set of skills, is a great way to learn a group set of skills even faster and more efficiently than one at a time. Sometimes one step back for every 2 or 3 forward is a good thing. Because the six skills for skiing are so mutually supportive, they must grow in unison so the developmental balance that your concept addresses is key.

 

The spiral staircase visual, cyclical graduating steps. floor to floor, the pillar representation of skills ... is genius in how something as complex can be immediately visualized by anyone. So, if I understand correctly, I might assume that each floor on the spiral staircase represents a focus on each of the six skills at the same performance level which would equate to the floor number. Because the six skills are mutually supportive, they must grow in unison so the developmental balance that your concept addresses is key.

 

Looking at a lot of the other ski learning programs, that of which is available online, I see presentation issues such as too simple, overly complex, scattered uncoordinated flow, categorization issues, imbalanced as in too much of any one thing, not enough of any one thing. Just like a website needs to meet user interface objectives, a teaching system/learning program needs to be able to draw in the casual observer.

 

Am I also correct that this type of learning format will work well for DVD w/online support and/or a week long ski camp? To be honest, I don't know how the PSIA really gets anywhere with individual skier development with such high rates of "one and done" students. Getting a private with the same instructor every week could easily add to thousands over a season and on top of all the other costs that come with skiing. Getting multiple online video analysis critiques from a good number of other qualified professionals in addition to what the typical online ski learning program would have to offer could give the expensive PSIA option a run for its money. 

I

post #10 of 33

well its a progression.  But the point I think Rick was trying to make is that by segwaying to a different topic and then coming back to the original topic, some kind of extra learning takes place.  This is really about stimulating different parts of the brain and getting into the subconscious.  That's where the cycle of learning styles is also effective.  I would love to hear about combining the two things together.

post #11 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

well its a progression.  But the point I think Rick was trying to make is that by segwaying to a different topic and then coming back to the original topic, some kind of extra learning takes place.  This is really about stimulating different parts of the brain and getting into the subconscious.  That's where the cycle of learning styles is also effective.  I would love to hear about combining the two things together.

 

Yes, BTS, I would think that at least the basics of Kolb's learning cycle are already intrinsic to the spiral staircase concept and that the spiral concept goes further in representing graduated levels of development and then even further with the pillar dynamic. The Kolb's two wheels of  learning cycle and learning style look like the same thing but for added notes on the learning style wheel. The "rinse and repeat" approach to learning works well for many learning styles. Anyway, Kolb's example seems to be an excellent proof of concept for the spiral staircase concept, at least partially. While Kolb's and Razie's wheels most certainly come across as very sound and accepted, they seem simple and flat as compared the holistic, balanced and multidimensional facets offered with the spiral staircase/six pillar concept. This organizational structure manages much more complexity while retaining the ease of visualizing and understanding the "spiral staircase". It is not just a good visual but also a great symbolic representation of "getting somewhere" better like "a deluxe apartment in the sky". (you won't get it if you aren't old enough)

 

While you and jasp are able to bring forth the scientific applications to most of the threads in this section, I tend to be more interested in program structure, it's applicability in the real world (how it will be understood by students) and marketability (how it will be understood by the prospective client market). While the spiral concept may have a good set of legs for its applicability as a learning program, it may have wings for its marketability. It would be exciting to see something like this fly. And, of course, programs like these require a good coach to guide the student through the learning structure and at least keeping them from falling off the staircase all together. 

post #12 of 33

oh I think they are more different then that.  Sorry Rick if I have introduced something that doesn't mesh with your thread, its not my intention.  I can see how the spiral concept makes for an excellent larger program structure and definitely marketable.  Perhaps one is micro level and the other is macro level.  For example, while working on one particular skill of the spiral, use the Kolb cycle to run through the lesson.  My only point was to support Rick's theory by pointing out the academic learning-theory model that is out there which also introduces the idea of changing gears, so to speak; and that some extra intuitive learning takes place by doing so.

 

I think Rick's spiral also is interesting because in terms of practical skill development, it creates a structure where no skill gets left behind.  Its a methodical way to cover them all, one at a time, first baby steps, and cycle back around, getting deeper and deeper with each revolution, but always covering them all in a methodical way.  it also creates a bit of a learning atmosphere where they are unconciously connected with each other.  Rick mentioned this earlier.  So for example, edging and balance are two seperate skills, but when we ski we are actually doing them both at the same time and so they are related and operating together.  All 6 skills are operating together in a unified whole operation, so switching from skill to skill, in a spiral, is good because this ties them together perhaps more in a way, then thinking of them as isolated separate skills.

post #13 of 33
Investigate post 2. The pathway and resource should let you investigate Bruner's theories. The bottom line is digesting information along a linear pathway verses a circular pathway where more lateral learning and blending of multiple skills takes place. The recurring themes get introduced and explored then like Weem's diamond we move on to a different focus.Although the diamond can be a bit more random when moving from corner to corner. A mix of both allows for some lesson structure in that the sequence of subjects is repeated. Sort of like regular school where each class period is scheduled daily and weekly.
post #14 of 33

I understand the concept that the Spiral Learning System promotes, that in order to progress each one of the six skill sets must be advanced at the same rate. But how do you justify the claim that this expert type of skiing is open to almost everyone and that we all posses the skill sets required. If someone is weak in one area, say balance, the type of learning system is suddenly going to give them good balance. In fact it will hold then back until their balance is up to par with the other skills, which may be never. So how does Spiral Learning overcome skill deficiencies where other systems can't? Remember, the promise is to look like that rare expert skier who cruises by you on the steepest of slopes.

post #15 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGolfAnalogy View Post
 

I understand the concept that the Spiral Learning System promotes, that in order to progress each one of the six skill sets must be advanced at the same rate. But how do you justify the claim that this expert type of skiing is open to almost everyone and that we all posses the skill sets required. If someone is weak in one area, say balance, the type of learning system is suddenly going to give them good balance. In fact it will hold then back until their balance is up to par with the other skills, which may be never. So how does Spiral Learning overcome skill deficiencies where other systems can't? Remember, the promise is to look like that rare expert skier who cruises by you on the steepest of slopes.

 

MGA, an unbalanced skill set is a major hamper on development on its own accord. If a skier is starkly lacking in one of the six fundamental skills, that will hamper getting to the next levels with the other skills in of itself. In other words, if you are a level 2 on balance and a level 3 on everything else, you will probably not get the 3's to 4's until the balance advances to 3. Hence the importance of a balanced skill development platform. A program like this is perfect for identifying a gravely lacking fundamental skill, giving it extra attention, catching it up to the others and resulting in a more balanced development and efficient learning. As well, these six skills are similar exercises in body control where there is a tendency that any athlete is going to come with a certain balance regardless of the performance "floor level" that they may enter the system with. I don't think you would ever find a skier who is a 2 in one skill and 4's and 5's in all the rest. It is mutually inclusive development. Many academic studies on early childhood learning and education show a very defined sequential order of intellectual and emotional skill development and that most or all of what is learned is highly dependent age associated level of development.

 

Another differentiation with this program is that Rick identifies it as a learning concept and not a teaching system/concept/etc. It is a student "centric" program. Because it is an easily understood multidimensional visual matrix, the student can see the specific path to development all the way up to the top floor. The student now has more control of the learning process which makes this a great remote learning system for online, DVD, video MA, mobile device ready, etc.

post #16 of 33
Thread Starter 

Guys, thanks for the comments about and support for my Spiral Learning concept.  Glad you see some value in it.  

 

Yes, Rich, Spiral Learning does also play well to something like my self teaching DVD program, though success is still dependent on the meat and potatoes of the training methodology that works within the spiral.  It doesn't have to be my program per say that needs to be in it to work, it just needs to be structured properly such that a progression of skill development happens in each skill area.  

 

And yes also, Rich, i do have people contact me for feedback on video they send me, looking for a progress report and direction going forward.  People also ski with me for that periodic feedback, or get a ski instructor near them on board with what they're doing (my program), and receive relevant feedback from them.  They even show the instructors they're working with the DVDs, so they can get them up to speed with what they're working on, where they are, and where they're going next, so the feedback is in accordance.  Instructors actually like it, because it creates a situation in which they develop a long term relationship with their student.

post #17 of 33
Thread Starter 

Mr, Golf, I understand your skepticism.  If it was so easy, you'd think you'd see experts all over the mountain.  I claim this to be a roadmap, but not necessarily a day trip.  It takes work and devotion to the program to reach the top of the mountain.  But experience has shown me that even the most athletically challenged students can get there if they follow the map, I've seen it happen repeatedly.  I don't make false claims, or blow smoke, I know it to be true.

post #18 of 33

I don't doubt that the above is true but in the interests of full disclosure i suspect that climbing the spiral in full make take a lot of time, effort and investment for some compared to others blessed with some natural skill components.  I quite like the concept as a selling/student understanding tool - perhaps there are also landings off the staircase where people may choose to reside quite comfortably ( depending on their ambition).  

 

I suspect that there's a reason that traditionally skiing levels have been laid out over 9 levels or whatever in that its a psychological boost and incentive to students who fly through the lower levels which are really very close together without realising the highest level might be on a log scale of commitment.  Maybe the spiral could be used as a more honest version.

post #19 of 33

it's a well established pattern in learning complex stuff and well worth using. 

 

Instead of dumping a lot of advanced theory on someone and let the hone one skill at a time, to perfection, this makes a lot more sense. You can't actually even hone "one skill" to perfection because the skills and movements are totally related... you can't tip the skis on edge without flexing and angulation for instance etc.

 

spiral learning imagery - there are many flavours and versions, with reflection and guided discovery and such thrown in, but the overall approach is the same.

 

if it takes a long time, it's not only because it is complex, but you are usually the problem (well, us learners, not you personally). most of the time we fight our selves: our lack of balance, our lack of physical conditioning, our lack of range of movements our lack of conviction our pre-conceived notions about skiing etc.

 

I have kids progressing from barely staying on top of a moving ski to what you'd consider advanced/expert in two seasons: no pre-conceptions, complete trust in the coach and dedication. You can always tell the students that will progress fast, well ahead of time... those big bright eyes that keep tracking you and the effort they put into every little drill. Just saying that there are more pre-requisites for someone to improve fast than just a learning model.

 

cheers

post #20 of 33

The only risk here is when the process creates the impression that the format becomes more important than the individual and their unique set of needs.

post #21 of 33
Things seem to be spiraling out of control! It really isn't this complex. It is summer, mind you😄
post #22 of 33
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbob View Post
 

I don't doubt that the above is true but in the interests of full disclosure i suspect that climbing the spiral in full make take a lot of time, effort and investment for some compared to others blessed with some natural skill components.  I quite like the concept as a selling/student understanding tool - perhaps there are also landings off the staircase where people may choose to reside quite comfortably ( depending on their ambition).  

 

 

 

I believe you're absolutely right about this, Bob, that people will naturally find proficiency contentment at different levels of the spiral.  They can certainly employ the concept with good results, regardless of how high they choose to ascend

 

In regards to that, one place I've found that  the value of this spiral concept bursts forth is with the frustrated terminal intermediate who really wants to improve but is stymied as to how.  Commonly the reason they're stuck on the plateau they are is because their skill development is out of balance.  They have foundation level skill deficiencies in one or more skill areas that are holding them back.  They're trying to perform a particular form of more advanced skiing, but as Razie just suggested, lacking foundation level skills in particular areas just won't allow them to get where they want to be.  

 

They may have been skiing for 20 years or more, they do not think of themselves as  beginners, but I always urge them to go right back to the base of the spiral and start working their way up from square one.  Invariably, the hole in their skill base very quickly shows its face, and developing those missing lower level skills usually serves to provide them with a very quick escape from the plateau they've been stuck on for so long.  

post #23 of 33
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post
 

 

 

I have kids progressing from barely staying on top of a moving ski to what you'd consider advanced/expert in two seasons: no pre-conceptions, complete trust in the coach and dedication. You can always tell the students that will progress fast, well ahead of time... those big bright eyes that keep tracking you and the effort they put into every little drill. Just saying that there are more pre-requisites for someone to improve fast than just a learning model.

 

 

 

So true!  The coach can also have a lot to do with his/her students developing those crucial success orientated behavior traits.  I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.  

 

I found it important to also develop a means of measuring progress that is completely individual based.  Not about how the student performs in relation to the other students  It keeps motivation high.  

post #24 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post
 

The only risk here is when the process creates the impression that the format becomes more important than the individual and their unique set of needs.

 

Yes, that is never a good thing. I would think it is a given that addressing a skier's unique needs within a program is of utmost importance whenever possible. Regarding a concern about about the possible impression given, I believe that the opposite may be true in that this program design is more student "centric" due to the programs quick and broad accessibility for a student to grasp and control the entire process while, of course, taking one clear step at a time. Spiraling through multiple fundamental skill sets may be a more thorough  way to define strengths and weaknesses as well as to address them along the way. 

 

After all, this is an online/mobile coaching service that is going to require students with both independence and motivation to make it work. It may also be a given that to make this work, the student is going to need the ability and commitment to obtain good and frequent video demo's for MA's. 

post #25 of 33

This is all pretty deep stuff for thinkers.  Thank god I am a feeler/doer! haha

 

Rick don't you think without thinking that "spiral learning" simply identifies how most skiers advance naturally?  In other words, if we simply learn to balance over the outside ski, doesn't all that lateral balance, angulation, inclination stuff take care of itself?  My brain already hurts just reading this thread.

 

It's snowing in Mammoth!

post #26 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
 

This is all pretty deep stuff for thinkers.  Thank god I am a feeler/doer! haha

 

Rick don't you think without thinking that "spiral learning" simply identifies how most skiers advance naturally?  In other words, if we simply learn to balance over the outside ski, doesn't all that lateral balance, angulation, inclination stuff take care of itself?  My brain already hurts just reading this thread.

 

It's snowing in Mammoth!

I'm with you on the feel - the only way I know my own skiing is sorta ok (though far from technically textbook perfect) is that it feels natural.  The more natural it feels in more complex terrain/conditions the better I'm getting.  And when I try something different I get to feel whether I am more or less stable etc etc. 

 

But isn't "feel" the holy grail and some developing skiers need something else to help them contextualise where they are on the (horrible phrase) "journey"?  Isn't that all Rick is offering ? (acknowledging that it is self interested in that it supports his modular remote ski coaching methodology too).

post #27 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbob View Post
 

I'm with you on the feel - the only way I know my own skiing is sorta ok (though far from technically textbook perfect) is that it feels natural.  The more natural it feels in more complex terrain/conditions the better I'm getting.  And when I try something different I get to feel whether I am more or less stable etc etc. 

 

But isn't "feel" the holy grail and some developing skiers need something else to help them contextualise where they are on the (horrible phrase) "journey"?  Isn't that all Rick is offering ? (acknowledging that it is self interested in that it supports his modular remote ski coaching methodology too).

You need to confirm. Video and MA. Also, learning should feel uncomfortable. 

 

http://sourcesofinsight.com/to-grow-stay-uncomfortable/

 

When you're comfortable and happy you are not progressing. :eek and thus you will become unhappy. Be unhappy now to be happy later. You will be happy at a later point, determined by others feeding you back from your own videos, taken when you are unhappy and uncomfortable.

 

:hissyfit: 


Edited by razie - 10/2/15 at 9:02am
post #28 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post
 

You need to confirm. Video and MA. Also, learning should feel uncomfortable. 

 

http://sourcesofinsight.com/to-grow-stay-uncomfortable/

 

When you're comfortable and happy you are not progressing. :eek and thus you will become unhappy. Be unhappy now to be happy later. You will be happy at a later point, determined by others feeding you back from your own videos, taken when you are unhappy and uncomfortable.

 

 

Couple of thoughts:

 

  • Learning could feel uncomfortable both mentally as you experience cognitive dissonance (the conflict between old and new ideas), and physically as you adjust to a new sensation. 
  • Skiing worse often also feels uncomfortable. Try rotating through all your turns, or over-pressuring your tips, or sitting on your tails to feel instantly uncomfortable. (Technically, this is "learning", since you're learning poor technique. But my point is to not conflate feeling uncomfortable with inherently better skiing.) 
  • It's also possible that a new skiing sensation can make a learner feel much more comfortable (e.g. when a skier learns to roll on edge gradually and suddenly feels grip throughout the turn). 

 

So while what you've said is true, razie, I think there are a lot of subtleties for both teachers and learners here around comfortable/uncomfortable feelings. 

post #29 of 33
Quote:

Originally Posted by razie View Post

...................................

You need to confirm. Video and MA. Also, learning should feel uncomfortable. 

 

http://sourcesofinsight.com/to-grow-stay-uncomfortable/

 

When you're comfortable and happy you are not progressing. :eek and thus you will become unhappy. Be unhappy now to be happy later. You will be happy at a later point, determined by others feeding you back from your own videos, taken when you are unhappy and uncomfortable.

 

:hissyfit: 

 

Thanks for that link.  There's some good stuff there.

post #30 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
 

Rick don't you think without thinking that "spiral learning" simply identifies how most skiers advance naturally?  In other words, if we simply learn to balance over the outside ski, doesn't all that lateral balance, angulation, inclination stuff take care of itself?

 

My non-expert, lay person opinion is that skills will advance together especially at early stages of learning to an extent. When one or two of basic skills start to fail to produce the desired results the stronger skills may compensate for the weaker ones. As one continues to progress, that imbalance may be reinforced by success and perceived improving ability. At it's best this is compensation. At worst, it's ingraining bad habits that will eventually impede progress. For those who are more athletically inclined they can probably progress to pretty high levels by compensating. The lower level athletes plateau and don't progress until those deficient skills are addressed. In either case, good instructors should be able to find those weaker skills to work on. It sounds like Rick's program helps to ensure that skills progress equally and this situation is avoided. It's hard to break bad habits. It sounds like a great program to teach those who are early in their skiing ability or who have been blessed with an even development of skills. I'd guess it might be a bit frustrating for those who are a bit further down the trail and have developed significant differences in the basic skills. That's often the case in progress though. You sometimes have to go backward temporarily to continue moving forward.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching